Saying Fabregas us invisible us factually wrong though, given the assists and the few goals he got last season

I think Ancelotti and Pep are two of the most over rated managers in the world.

Considering that you referred to virtually every user of this website other than you as misinformed, i'd say the onus of proof is on you to back up your supposed gospel statements.

I already referred to examples in the previous. I'm not going to go back and specifically find every post by every user though, for obvious reasons.

Regardless, you have to explain why my opinion on Sterling is nonsense when I already made a post on why I believe it's not the case.

 

That being said I don't have to look far and wide to find justification of why your well-informed opinions are actually baseless bullsh*t, how about the fact that Eden Hazard was voted by his peers as the PFA Young Player of the Year in the season where Sterling supposedly played better. And who was one of the nominees that he beat to that award? You guessed it, Raheem Sterling.

 

If my memory serves me correctly Hazard, unlike Sterling, was also nominated for the PFA player of the year that season.

So you haven't really refuted anything, but this time, instead of trying to give examinations of both players abilities, you mention PFA awards!(but hey, at least it's not the pundits this time.) Giggs won it a few years ago after playing starting 7 games, so not too sure if you want to use that as the crux of your argument. I'll predict that you'll go for the team of the year now

Still waiting on those articles.

Or, again, your actual refutation of my argument I posted earlier.

As I said, this was two seasons ago when he was 18/19 -- the Hazard of last season was better. But nonetheless, the raw facts are Sterling has been putting in the same kind of numbers whilst at a poorer Liverpool team throughout both seasons.

 

There's a reason why City paid 50m and we why chelsea were willing to pay 40m 

Sterling has a few more goals and assists since these. 

 

Hazard is the shoe-in for player of the year, plays in a vastly superior team, Sterling has been shunted all over the pitch, and Hazard is 4 years older. 

 

 Sterling actually beat him for non peno goals and assists last season, and is toe to toe with him this year.

 

 

------------------------------------------------

 

Here's one for finishing ability:

 

(http://www.squawka.com/football-play...ots#desc#total) His accuracy rate was 67% - the top strikers are around the world are 50-60%. That could be indicative of Raheem not trying his luck very much with us, which could be true, and could be him just not playing as striker, where more shots are taken. 

Raheem took 45 shots in 2200 minutes, with accuracy 67 and a shots to goal of 5. 

Aguero took 86 shots in 1500minutes, accuracy 60, had a shots to goals of 5. 

Sturridge 99 shots in 2270, accuracy 49, spg of 4.7. 

Suarez 181, 3000, 53, 5.8

So he's in line with the division's best strikers essentially, beating them for accuracy but taking less shots. 

 

Hazard 73, 2900, 59, 6.9* (took out 4 penalties he took) 

 

Sterling's finishing stats destroy comparable wingers, and that too using minutes from before he blossomed. 

But hey, I don't know how to argue back and you know better than the players themselves!

No, you don't. Well at least, you might, but you haven't demonstrated any keen ability to. It's nothing to do with me knowing the players -- it to do with me watching both of them carefully to make a comparison for myself (with stats supplements). Are you able to do the same?

Edited August 8, 201510 yr by MANoWAR

Your post stated that the rest of us are misinformed in contrast to your well-informed self.

 

Then I went on to show that the players that actually play with and against the players that formed the basis of your example of how well-informed you are, all disagree with you, as evidenced by the players awards given in the year in question

 

So, being the well-informed gentleman that you are, you attempt to discredit the awards by

 

a) claiming that because you have a fancy colored diagram with some online stats you know better than everyone else including apparently those that actually play with and against the players in question

 

b) claiming that because Ryan Giggs once won the award in question while only playing 8 games they are therefore meaningless.

 

So I have a few problems with these statements.

 

The first is that, your original post talked about their respective 2013-2014 seasons. Those stats are from the 2014-2015 season.

 

The second is that those stats don't even show Sterling to be even better.

 

The third is that, Ryan Giggs won the PFA YPOTY in '92 and '93, playing 38 and 41 league games respectively. Unless you were talking about when Giggs won the PFA POTY in 2009, when he only managed 29 league games!

 

I must say, for someone who publicly prides themselves on having such well-informed opinions, there is a startling amount of misinformation in your posts!

Edited August 8, 201510 yr by Jonty

Can anyone else detect the sexual tension in the room?

Your post stated that the rest of us are misinformed in contrast to your well-informed self. 

 

No, the post stated it was annoying people were commenting on players they had no clue about.

 

I never mentioned that I knew more than everybody in everything.

Then I went on to show that the players that actually play with and against the players that formed the basis of your example of how well-informed you are, all disagree with you, as evidenced by the players awards given in the year in question

 

What? You first mentioned punditry without giving any example, and then went on to mention PFA awards. It's not a unanimous agreement that Hazard trumps Sterling in everything either. 

 

So, being the well-informed gentleman that you are, you attempt to discredit the awards by

 

a) claiming that because you have a fancy colored diagram with some online stats you know better than everyone else including apparently those that actually play with and against the players in question

 

A fancy coloured diagram which shows Sterling has put up the same / similar numbers to Hazard? That one? I laid it out nicely for you to compare. What exactly disproves the idea that he Sterling matched EH in those attacking stats?

 

I also stated that he'd been shunted around the pitch (supposedly 8 different positions throughout), playing with poorer players compared to Hazard who's been confined to the wing / attacking mid whilst still matching Hazard on the mentioned stats. So, "as good" holds true there, if not better if you want to consider the sh*t he often played with.

b) claiming that because Ryan Giggs once won the award in question while only playing 8 games they are therefore meaningless.

Starting 8 games.

 

If I want to mention more I could mention Aguero hasn't been mentioned in any PFA team of the year, despite being the best overall striker in the league.  The fact Aguero lost out to Kyle Walker in the young PFA award. The fact Coutinho was nominated last year despite only being good from February onwards. The fact that Chelsea's best player in Juan Mata was nominated for neither the young PFA nor senior PFA in 2012, despite leading (or going very high) in chances made and goals scored. Many variables which make this unreliable -- it doesn't beat actual anaylsis' of the players  themselves. 

So I have a few problems with these statements.

 

The first is that, your original post talked about their respective 2013-2014 seasons. Those stats are from the 2014-2015 season.

 

The second is that those stats don't even show Sterling to be even better.

 

I don't know what to say to this. The stats show that Sterling has been matching Hazard for the numbers in all the attributes listed previously, and they do.  Sterling has a few more goals and assists since these. Hazard got the for player of the year, plays in a vastly superior team, Sterling has been shunted all over the pitch, and Hazard is 4 years older. 

 

Sterling actually beat him for non peno goals and assists the season before that, and was toe to toe with him a few months ago. The fact that they point more towards last season where Liverpool were sh*tter only bolsters my point about Sterling's potential even moreso. The second set of stats also involves 2013-14, and not 2014-15. Even if I wasn't going to show all the matching stats for both seasons, it doesn't take away about Sterling's potential vs Hazard, which I'm sure you would dispute. (also part of my initial post). You're welcome to search yourself.

I must say, for someone who publicly prides themselves on having such well-informed opinions, there is a startling amount of misinformation in your posts!

 

Startling? I said Sterling matched Hazard on numbers. He did. I've said he does this in a poorer liverpool team. That's obviously true. I said that it's annoying people talk about players who they don't know about, giving examples of that. I said Giggs won it after starting 8 games (although playing was before the word for some reason but the 'starting' shouldn't be ignored). So, where is the 'startling' misinformation?

If you've ever watched Liverpool closely, all of this would make sense. You don't, coupled with natural Chelsea bias (which we're all prone to) , you're referring to awards or baseless punditry without saying why each point itself is wrong. Dispute any of the following: 

 

Do the stats show Sterling matches Hazard? They do.

Has Sterling played in poorer teams than Hazard? Yes.

Is Hazard older than him? Yes.

Has Sterling been shunted around the pitch? Yes.

Does it show a comparison from both seasons? Yes.

Has Sterling carried Liverpool for much of the season, prompting a move to a better team? Well, if you've seen Liverpool, then you would easily think yes.

Has Sterling shown his versatility through various positions on the pitch? Yes. 

All the above make a compelling case for Sterling has potential similar to that of Hazard, and why it's not necessarily wrong to say he was as good as him (if not better at times... depending on the variables taken) throughout the past few seasons.

 

 

I feel this won't change anybody's opinion, so I might just leave it there. Certainly won't change mine anyways (a lot of these posts made have taken into consideration many other Hazard vs Sterling debates, so this is not the first time I've read or thought about something like this)

Edited August 8, 201510 yr by MANoWAR

I think some valid points made on both sides of the net re:MANoWAR vs. Jonty. The concern is there is a point where constructive and healthy debate becomes vitriolic in nature. The key thing is we sometimes agree to disagree and still stand together waving s blue flag. KTBFFH!

Edited August 8, 201510 yr by MissouriBlue

Not a big fan of Cahill, I'd start Zouma.

I had a feeling things would boil over in this thread at some point, i think it was inevitable

All in good fun of course

Can anyone else detect the sexual tension in the room?

You mean between MoW and Raheem Sterling?

Can anyone else detect the sexual tension in the room?

 

 

Well, it's not doing anything for my libido, but if you get a frisson from it, that's OK by me!  (but weird)

 

I feel this won't change anybody's opinion, so I might just leave it there. Certainly won't change mine anyways (a lot of these posts made have taken into consideration many other Hazard vs Sterling debates, so this is not the first time I've read or thought about something like this)

 

mmmm...well on my reading of your joust with jonty I have to say that the latter took your argument apart very adroitly. Now you say that it may not change anybody's opinion, least of all yours etc etc (very debatable) but I think it would be a shame if you learn nothing from the exercise. Your initial bold & rather sterile assertion concerning the worth of the material players was rightfully taken issue with after which you just pushed harder down on a petard of your own making by making further submissions which, in turn, were rather rubbish. If being owned is your idea of "fun" then, of course, that's entirely a matter for you but perhaps in future a concession that you've been thoroughly bested might lead to others losing less respect for your views & method than otherwise may have been the case.

Edited August 8, 201510 yr by youlots

mmmm...well on my reading of your joust with jonty I have to say that the latter took your argument apart very adroitly. Now you say that it may not change anybody's opinion, least of all yours etc etc (very debatable) but I think it would be a shame if you learn nothing from the exercise. Your initial bold & rather sterile assertion concerning the worth of the material players was rightfully taken issue with after which you just pushed harder down on a petard of your own making by making further submissions which, in turn, were rather rubbish. If being owned is your idea of "fun" then, of course, that's entirely a matter for you but perhaps in future a concession that you've been thoroughly bested might lead to others losing less respect for your views & method than otherwise may have been the case.

I feel this is some kind of bait in itself but nonetheless

appreciate the advice... (I think?) However, I've seen this many times before, and i'm going off lots of facts (stats) and things which have happened in the past (Sterling playing for a poor liverpool team etc.), so it would take something to change my stance on that.

I'd like to know how it was taken apart so adroitly though if that's ok, because as you say, it's all about learning so maybe I'll learn something new.

Edited August 8, 201510 yr by MANoWAR

^ not at all "bait" - offered in good faith.

Isn't this meant to be a confession thread, you know with impunity; not a ' comment on someone's confession' thread.

While I'm here, 'camel lip' I always thought Frank had a smaller version, there I've said it.

Controversial opinions are fine but talking absolute sh*t isn't.

Lol, fair point. I didn't think he crossed a line though I don't agree with his argument.

Aspi runs about a lot, and makes the occasional tackle. But he is stil sub-par when it comes to Cole. Have that.

 

Well he does more than that, and Cole is the greatest LB of the premier league era so it's not exactly fair being compared to him.

Ashley Cole had another season in him here. He basically retired when he left for rome.

Lol, fair point. I didn't think he crossed a line though I don't agree with his argument.

I probably could have explained my point better or at all to be fair.

Here's an unholy confession for you........i don't like Azpilicueta being called Dave, i will never call him that

Please may I be absolved for enjoying all the Cech jokes today.

Please may I be absolved for enjoying all the Cech jokes today.

 

cech out the highlights. 

 

agent cech trojan horse. 

 

cech sold for £10m and still worth 9 points a season for CFC

 

cech mate

I have nothing against him he's a wonderful player. Fabregas with the ball is a creative genius. But he's playing as a central midfielder so the onus is on him to help marshal the midfield and protect the back four. Bearing that in mind how many times do you see players skip past him like he's not even there.

There's a reason some think our midfield is what held us back from progressing further in the champions league.

my confession is, i wish we played like arsenal...